dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 13, 2024 In Re: 31650627 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in the field of finance, seeks employment-based second preference 
(EB-2) immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well 
as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this classification. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
qualified as an advanced degree professional, he did not establish that a waiver of the required job 
offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 1 The matter is now before 
us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the 
term "national interest," Matter of Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the 
framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 2 grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
1 An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a 
bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master' s degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
2 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
A petitioner must identify the specific endeavor they propose to undertake. Id. at 889. On Part 6 of 
the petition, the Petitioner indicated that his proposed employment is financial manager and in his 
definitive statement, he stated that he intended to work as a "Financial Manager/ Entrepreneur." In 
addition, the Petitioner provided a business plan which stated that his proposed endeavor is to establish 
"an independent financial and investment assessments firm that will act responsibly and transparently 
with its clients with the objective of providing comprehensive financial advisory and developing 
financial products, control systems and adequacy of investment portfolio services" and that he would 
be the owner, chief executive officer, and certified financial planner of the endeavor. The business 
plan also indicated that the endeavor's headquarters will be inl I Illinois with expansion plans 
to operate inl IVirginia, and Alabama. 
However, on appeal, the Petitioner repeatedly provides inconsistent information which calls into 
question the specifics of his proposed endeavor. For example, in addition to referring to his initially 
described endeavor, he states that his "proposed endeavor is to come to the United States to work as 
an Accounting Supervisor in the Financial Services Industry" and that he "intends to continue his 
career working in the U.S. business sector as an Accounting Supervisor in the Financial Services 
Industry." He also repeatedly references Mexico, providing such information as its gross domestic 
product and asserts his "in-depth knowledge of the business environment in Mexico will benefit U.S. 
companies and the U.S. economy" and that "[m]any U.S. companies are doing or planning to do 
business in Mexico to take advantage of the size of the Mexican economy and its vast market 
opportunities." But the business plan did not indicate that the Petitioner will do any business in 
Mexico. Furthermore, the Petitioner's resume and employments letters do not show that he has any 
experience either in or working with Mexico. Moreover, the Petitioner mistakenly and repeatedly uses 
feminine pronouns in several places in the appeal brief and claims that he will generate $5.9 million 
in revenue and 13 jobs during the first five years of operations in the state of Florida, but then states 
that his company will be inl I The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies in the record 
with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 
59192 (BIA 1988). 
Because the Petitioner has not consistently described his proposed endeavor, we cannot conclude that 
he has sufficiently established its substantial merit and national importance. And because the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that his proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national 
importance as required by the first Dhanasar prong, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
Therefore, we reserve our opinion regarding the second and third Dhanasar prongs. See INS v 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues 
the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N 
in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 
in nature). 
2 
Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is 
otherwise ineligible). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
3